OHA Racist Kau Inoa TV Commercials -- transcripts and analysis; plus background information about how the Kau Inoa program fits into strategy for the Akaka bill, and how much OHA has spent on lobbying. Transcripts and analysis of commercials made by four celebrities are featured on this webpage: Riatea Helm, Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, Vicky Holt Takamine, and Butch Helemano.

Photo included in article in Honolulu Advertiser, Sunday, August 19, 2007
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070819/OPINION03/708190305/1110/OPINION03
With this caption:
"Leona Kalima, left, of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, explained the Kau Inoa movement to Ha'aheo Frias, Pomai Frias and Wenda Namocot as they filled out registration forms. OHA says compiling a registry of Native Hawaiians is the first step in creating a Hawaiian governing entity."

SUMMARY

This webpage provides transcripts and analyses of three especially offensive racist TV commercials for OHA's Kau Inoa project, featuring Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, Vicky Holt Takamine, and Butch Helemano. A fourth "cutesy" commercial featuring youthful singer Raiatea Helm is also described. These commercials were broadcast repeatedly on all major and many minor TV stations throughout Hawaii during at least early to mid 2007. The commercials are racist and offensive because they say explicitly, or strongly imply, that ethnic Hawaiians are uniquely descended from the gods and are brothers to the land in a way nobody else can ever be; the 80% of Hawaii's people who lack a drop of Hawaiian blood can (and perhaps should) go "back" to their ancestral homeland (even if they and their parents and grandparents have never been there); and ethnic Hawaiians have the genetically encoded ability to perceive spirituality and messages in land, sea, and sky which nobody can perceive who lacks a drop of the magic blood.

"Kau Inoa" literally means "Place [your] name" or, informally, "Sign up." The State of Hawaii Office of Hawaiian Affairs [OHA] is sponsoring this project to get ethnic Hawaiians to sign up for a racial registry. Anyone with a single drop of Hawaiian native blood can register, no matter where in the world they live. All such people would be eligible to join the phony Indian tribe which the Akaka bill proposes to create. The Kau Inoa registry would probably serve as the initial membership roll for the Akaka tribe, and could also be used as the membership roll for a state-recognized tribe in case the Akaka bill fails to deliver federal recognition.

First some background information; then the transcripts and analyses.

BACKGROUND -- AKAKA BILL LOBBYING AND THE KAU INOA PROGRAM

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs has spent enormous amounts of money lobbying and advertising for the Akaka bill from 2000 through 2007 -- numerous personal visits to Washington D.C., using first-class travel, by trustees, bureaucrats, lobbyists in "auntie" outfits, and hula groups; expensive ads on TV, radio, and newspapers (sometimes hour-long TV infomercials and full-page newspaper ads); community meetings in Hawaii and on the mainland with slickly packaged portfolios of documents and CDs given to thousands of attendees; brochures mass-mailed to hundreds of thousands, etc.

OHA, a branch of the state government, has repeatedly refused to disclose how much money it has spent on these various activities despite freedom-of-information demands from reporters. An investigative reporter published an article in the Honolulu Advertiser on November 27, 2006 citing publicly available information from official Congressional reports on who paid how much for lobbying. That article has the headline "OHA push for Akaka bill topped $2M." But even the reporter in that article notes that the amount in the Congressional report is only a small fraction of the total OHA has spent in all venues. People interested in assembling financial data from published reports over the years about OHA spending on the Akaka bill are advised to visit this website's compilations of news reports and use their computer's "find" function with keyword "lobby". The compilation index for the 109th Congress includes links to compilations from earlier years. The indexes provide only brief summaries of each published item; however, the full text of each news report can be found on sub-pages as linked from the index page. Happy hunting! Begin at the index page for the 109th Congress, search for "lobby", find the dates of news reports that appear likely to contain financial information, and then go to the subpage for that period of time to find the full text of the news report. Start here "History of the Hawaiian Government Reorganization bill in the 109th Congress (January 2005 through December 2006)" at
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/AkakaHist109thCong.html

OHA has spent additional megabucks on its program to compile a racial registry. This "Kau Inoa" program seeks to get as many ethnic Hawaiians as possible, throughout the world, to "sign [their] name[s]" on a racial registration form accompanied by birth certificates or other documents proving that they have at least one drop of Hawaiian native blood. Parents can register their children; adult children can register their elderly or disabled parents.

The Kau Inoa registry is widely expected to be used as an initial membership roll for the anticipated Akaka tribe, although OHA officials deny that and encourage all ethnic Hawaiians to sign up whether or not they support the Akaka bill. The Kau Inoa registry could also be used to begin a process of creating a tribal group recognized by the State of Hawaii even if the Akaka bill fails and there is no federal recognition.

OHA has done all the same things to advertise the Kau Inoa project that it has done to advertise for the Akaka bill, including travel for community outreach in Hawaii and the mainland; mailouts; thousands of ads on TV, radio, and newspapers; free T-shirts; plus the large expense of processing tens of thousands of applications and filing the accompanying documents that prove native ancestry. And again, as with its support for the Akaka bill, OHA has refused to disclose how much it has spent on these activities. Unfortunately there have been no published reports on how much OHA has spent on the Kau Inoa program, but the amount would clearly be in the millions of dollars.

The Kau Inoa project was launched with public ceremony and media coverage on January 17, 2004 at the Kamehameha Statue fronting Ali'iolani Hale (Supreme Court building) in Honolulu. That date was chosen because it was the 111th anniversary of the revolution of 1893 that overthrew the Hawaiian monarchy -- an event for which the United States Congress passed and President Clinton signed a misguided and factually inaccurate resolution in 1993 apologizing to Native Hawaiians alone for the overthrow of a government in which many of the leaders and many more full-fledged subjects (citizens) and voters were Caucasian. That apology resolution is the major rationalization for the Akaka bill.

Ethnic Hawaiians are voting with their feet against racial separatism. During its first 42 months Kau Inoa has reportedly registered 67,000 names. That's less than 17% of the 401,000 people who checked the box for "Native Hawaiian" in Census 2000 -- despite three and a half years of intensive advertising and outreach. It seems reasonable to predict that most of those who will eventually sign up have already done so, and the rate of future signups will probably decline to a trickle even with increased expenditures on advertising and outreach.

For the confidential OHA memo outlining a process and timetable for establishing a state-recognized tribe (regardless whether the Akaka bill passes), see "KKK -- Kanaka Klub -- Office of Hawaiian Affairs confidential memo of June 2006 outlining OHA plans for setting up Hawaiian apartheid regime following failure of the Akaka bill" at:
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/OHAplanBmemojune2006.html
See also a compilation of news reports and commentaries about the steps OHA has already taken to implement the plan. See "Office of Hawaiian Affairs -- Watching the Moves It Makes to Expand the Evil Empire (acquiring huge parcels of land, building a headquarters for the "nation", considering purchase of a TV station, etc.)" at:
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/EvilEmpireOHA.html

During early and mid 2007 a new wave of Kau Inoa TV commercials used at least four ethnic Hawaiian political/cultural celebrities to plead with people to place their names into the racial registry. Each commercial was 30 seconds long, featuring a single celebrity looking directly into the camera and "speaking from the heart." Four of those commercials have transcripts and commentaries on this webpage, below -- featuring Riatea Helm, Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, Vicky Holt Takamine, and Butch Helemano. These commercials were aired on every major broadcast TV station in Hawaii, and many cable channels, often every day during the morning, 5 PM, 6 PM and 10 PM newscasts and also during local-commercial breaks in nationally televised news, movie, or drama programs. That's in addition to the "normal" OHA ads for the Akaka bill and the OHA brand-recognition commercials not directly related to the Kau Inoa program: see "OHA Brand-Recognition Commercials -- Big Bucks for Self-Promotion by a Government Agency With an Evil Agenda" at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/OHAbrandrecogcom.html

Later in 2007 another wave of new Kau Inoa commercials began appearing on TV, radio, and newspapers. Some of those commercials have transcripts and analysis on different webpages:

Malia Craver Kau Inoa TV/radio commercials late 2007 -- Hawaiian and English transcripts and commentary. Also a Dennis Kamakahi commercial. Ms. Craver uses her prestige and Hawaiian language to ask ethnic Hawaiians to sign up on a racial separatist registry despite her previous speech to the United Nations urging love, forgiveness, and inter-racial unity. In English she scolds Caucasians for coming to Hawaii in the 1800s and not helping ethnic Hawaiians (false), inferring that Hawaiians were not capable of managing their own affairs; even while she supports a program whose purpose is supposedly to foster self-reliance and self-determination.
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/KauInoaCraverKamakahi.html

In January 2008 the Kau Inoa program became highly controversial when a series of political cartoons poking fun at it were published on a blog named "Zero Shibai" and reprinted in the online newspaper Hawaii Reporter. The cartoons drew a written protest from OHA chair Haunani Apoliona, and her protest stimulated both serious and sarcastic responses. See: "Bovine Flatulence -- Zero Shibai blog Kau Inoa cartoons (Overthrow victim, Kau Manua, Cow Inoa) cause OHA chair Haunani Apoliona to have a cow." at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/big60/ZeroShibaiKauInoa.html

The whole idea of a government agency advertising for people to sign up on a racial registry is deeply offensive and racist. Putting such ads on television spews that racism directly into the living rooms of all Hawaii's people, 80% of whom are not eligible to sign up. It's a direct slap in the face, coming unexpectedly and unpredictably in the middle of TV shows which people are watching for relaxation or pleasure after a hard day's work, or to find out what newsworthy events happened that day.

Within that context the first commercial described below was not unnecessarily racist and needs no extended analysis; but the final three deserve closer scrutiny to plumb the metaphysical depths of their racism.

RAIATEA HELM

Within the overall racist context of the Kau Inoa project, the ad featuring Raiatea Helm was not more racist than necessary. She is a rising star -- a 20-ish singer of Hawaiian songs who has several best-selling albums, and still speaks with a "little girl" style and "cutesy" mannerisms appealing to teenagers and young adults. She wore blue jeans and a brightly colored sleeveless scoop-neck blouse showing off her luscious skin and hinting at a modest cleavage. Her body wiggled and she swung her arms with excitement as she spoke, occasionally putting her fingers into the shallow pockets of her tight jeans, simulating nervousness or a casual attitude of "hey, it's just little old me." She said nothing especially substantive, merely exuding cuteness. She said [fingers in pockets] "For me, Kau Inoa means that we all get together and [brief pause followed by shoulder shrug, rising eyebrows and rising pitch] SPEAK UP." She asked the rhetorical question "Why is it important?" And her answer was "Cuz it IS!" reminiscent of the common saying "Just do it!" Then she ended with the customary "I am Raiatea Helm and I placed my name" while her celebrity single-name signature "Raiatea" scrawled itself in the air next to her shoulder. The ad was clearly designed to appeal to young people, but also to reassure Hawaii's multiracial community of all ages that we have nothing to fear from such a charming, pleasant, easy-going sovereignty movement. Nonsense! We have much to fear. Read the wakeup-call book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" with a free preview at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/BookPromo.html

LILIKALA KAME'ELEIHIWA

Lily Dorton, who repudiated her haole father's name by giving herself the name Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, is former head, and current Professor, in the Center for Hawaiian Studies at the University of Hawaii flagship campus at Manoa. She has a high public profile as a self-appointed spokesperson for ethnic Hawaiians on every controversial topic, thrusting herself in front of TV cameras when there are court hearings. She was dressed in a black scoop-neck blouse with a kihei or pareu wrapped around her chest with a knot in front, mostly red with black decoration, intended to make her look regal and symbolically signifying readiness for battle. She spoke with a tone of seriousness and urgency conveyed by using very short sentences with full stops. She tossed in a sentence in Hawaiian for authenticity. Here is the full text of her 30-second commercial, which was delivered in a pleasant but determined tone of voice. Some analysis follows the transcript, regarding the element of racial/religious fascism contained in her opening sentence mentioning Haloa.

"WE who descend from Haloa. WE who have lived here for one hundred generations. We are at a critical moment in our history. We need to form a new Hawaiian government. We need to kau inoa. We need to sign our names and to declare ourselves willing citizens. The time is now. I ask you PLEASE -- kau inoa NOW. For the sake of our grandchildren and the next one hundred generations. O wau no o Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, a ua KAU ko'u inoa." [the closing sentence translates as: I am indeed Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa, and I have PLACED my name.]

The first sentence calls upon ethic Hawaiians as a group by addressing them as "we who descend from Haloa." Descent from Haloa is the one and only thing that all ethnic Hawaiians share in common, regardless of how little native blood they have or how little of the culture they know and practice. It is the one and only thing that separates everyone else from ethnic Hawaiians, and keeps them forever identified as outsiders, strangers, settlers, mere guests in the Hawaiian ancestral homeland regardless of how many generations they have lived here.

This is the story, drawing upon the Hawaiian creation legend "Kumulipo" but greatly compressed.

In the beginning the gods mated and gave birth to the Hawaiian islands as living beings. Later the gods mated and gave birth to a stillborn baby whose body they buried in the ground, from which grew the first taro plant. Later the gods mated and gave birth to a beautiful baby boy named Haloa, who was the primordial ancestor of all ethnic Hawaiians. Thus anyone who has even one drop of Hawaiian native blood is a descendant of Haloa. Ethnic Hawaiians are children of the gods, and younger brothers of these living islands and of the taro plant. The land itself is alive -- even the rocks -- filled with the same spirit of the gods that dwells in every person possessing a drop of native blood. Everyone lacking a precious drop of the magic blood of Haloa is forever outside that family.

This is a religious belief which is used to support a political agenda of racial separatism and racial supremacy. As children of the gods and brothers of the land, ethnic Hawaiians are inherently entitled to be the caretakers of these islands. They have a divine right to exercise political authority to make decisions about how the land should be used, who should be allowed to live here, what should be Hawaii's policies regarding immigration and foreign affairs, etc.

Using a religious belief to assert racial supremacy and a god-given right to political power is very dangerous, especially in a multiracial, multireligious society. It reminds us of what happened in Germany and Japan during the 1930s and early 1940s. This sort of religious/racial fascism reminds us of today's Islamist extremists. It's the sort of theory that caused tremendous tragedy in Bosnia, Zimbabwe, Rwanda, and Darfur; and the race-based military coup that overthrew a democratically elected government in Fiji headed by an ethnic Asian in order to replace him with a native Fijian on the grounds that "Fiji [the nation] belongs to the Fijians [racial group]."

For further information about Hawaiian religious fascism, see "Religion and zealotry in the hawaiian sovereignty movement -- how religious myths are used to support political claims for racial supremacy in Hawai'i" at
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/religion.html
See also Chapter 8: Indigenous Rights and Religious Fascism in Support of Hawaiian Racial Supremacy" in the book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" with a free preview at
http://www.angelfire.com/planet/bigfiles40/BookPromo.html

For a discussion of how Hawaiian language is used for the political purpose of lending credibility, mystery, and authoritativeness to public speeches (just as Latin was used in the Catholic mass during modern times even though nobody in the pews knew what the priest was saying), see:
"Hawaii Legislature Informational Briefing Regarding the Akaka Bill by U.S. Senators Inouye and Akaka, and U.S. Representatives Abercrombie and Case, on March 31, 2005 (Hawaiian language, Christian prayer, failure of Legislature to perform due diligence)" at:
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/bigfiles3/AkakaHawLegisBrfngFedDeleg033105.html

VICKY HOLT TAKAMINE

Vicky Holt Takamine is a kumu hula (hula teacher) who became politically active years ago when a bill was introduced in the Legislature to regulate "Native Hawaiian gathering rights" as authorized in the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision in PASH. She led a day-and-night protest in the rotunda at the Legislature, beating loudly on large pahu drums, until finally the legislation was withdrawn. She then founded the organization 'Ilio'ulaokalani which has lobbied and led marches on environmental and political issues, and was granted legal standing to intervene in the "Barrett" lawsuit on the portion of that case concerning gathering rights. More recently 'Ilio'ulaokalani has organized meetings of scholars and cultural practitioners regarding strategy for asserting claims to "indigenous" group intellectual property rights.

In her 30-second commercial Takamine wore a blue mu'umu'u (floor-length dress) with white Hawaiian designs, gold bracelet on each arm, earrings, necklace, and a white flower over her right ear. She spoke clearly, calmly, and with occasional smiles. She mentioned that her Hawaiian name Hanaka'ulaniokamamalu reminds her of her "responsibilities as a Native Hawaiian." She pronounced that name with a clear glottal stop indicated by the 'okina (apostrophe), although it is doubtful whether that should be present in view of the various possible meanings of the possible components of her name, depending on how it is broken up. There are too many varying interpretations to be analyzed here. One possibility is that the ending portion "mamalu" might indicate an umbrella, or shield or protector; which would correspond to the role she sees herself fulfilling as her "responsibilities as a Native Hawaiian" in protecting Hawaiian "rights." However, a different interpretation is that the last portion of her name should be regarded as "kamamalu" which could be a reference to a high chiefess by that name during the early Kingdom period.

Some analysis follows the transcript, regarding Takamine's outrageous racist claim that everyone who lacks Hawaiian native blood has an ancestral home elsewhere to which they could (and perhaps should) return. Here's what she said:

"My Hawaiian name Hanaka'ulaniokamamalu reminds me of my responsibilities as a Native Hawaiian. We've been colonized to the point of NEARLY extinction of our Hawaiian language; of our cultural practices. Every other people that come here to these islands have an ancestral homeland that they can go back to. There's no place for us to go. Kau Inoa is the first step in moving toward self-determination. I am Vicky Holt Takamine, and I have placed my name."

Takamine clearly says "Every other people that come here to these islands have an ancestral homeland that they can go back to. There's no place for us to go."

That concept has been repeated constantly for many years by many Hawaiian sovereignty zealots. It is asserted in a calm, matter-of-fact way as though it is commonsense. The theory is that "indigenous" people sprang forth from the land, whereas everyone else came from outside. But anthropological evidence indicates less than 2,000 years of human occupancy of Hawaii. Ethnic Hawaiians today take great pride in the resurgence of Polynesian voyaging canoes which they believe were used in ancient times to bring the first settlers to Hawaii (probably from the Marquesas). Hawaiian activists bristle when someone says that everyone in Hawaii, including "Native Hawaiians," is either a settler or comes from ancestors who were settlers. They say that 100 generations, or even only 30 generations (dating from the invasion and takeover by Tahitians and probably extermination of the Marquesans), makes them far more "local" than everyone else and entitled to be called "indigenous." Even though most ethnic Hawaiians have low native blood quantum and are therefore mostly something other than Hawaiian, the one drop of native blood is what makes them "indigenous."

It is outrageously racist, and insulting, to say "Every other people that come here to these islands have an ancestral homeland that they can go back to. There's no place for us to go."

Some Caucasian families have lived in Hawaii for 8 generations. Their early generations played a huge role in helping Kamehameha The Great unify all the islands for the first time in history; and in bringing Christianity and written language to Hawaii. They became naturalized subjects of the Kingdom, and their children were native-born subjects, with voting and property rights fully equal to the natives. They helped the economy of Hawaii produce wealth that lifted natives out of desperate poverty. They brought the concept of human rights and rule of law, lifting maka'ainana (commoners) out of their utter subjugation to arbitrary whims of sometimes brutal ali'i (chiefs). Likewise, some Chinese and Japanese families have 6 generations in Hawaii, beginning with immigrants who were businessmen or who worked on the sugar plantations during the Kingdom. Some of them became naturalized subjects, and some of them had children born during the Kingdom as native-born subjects fully equal to ethnic Hawaiians. Filipinos in 2006 celebrated the centennial of their arrival, so some of them have 4 or 5 generations here.

To say that someone can go back to somewhere else is insulting to people who want to remain here. To say that to multigeneration families is clearly false. Would a 4th generation ethnic Japanese man be able to go "back" to Japan where he has never been? If that were so, then why can't someone who is 88% Japanese and 12% Hawaiian also go "back" to Japan, thus showing the falsehood of Takamine's claim that "There's no place for us to go"? To say that someone of Irish or Chinese ancestry whose founding settler came here 150 years ago can go back to Ireland or China, is like telling an African-American whose ancestor slave was dragged to America in chains that same length of time ago that he can go back to Africa. On the mainland, Vicky Takamine would start a race riot with a statement like that.

Multigeneration ethnic Japanese in Hawaii are unable to feel at home anywhere else but in Hawaii. So says the book "Jan Ken Po: The world of Hawaii's Japanese Americans" by Dennis M. Ogawa; with a foreword by Daniel K. Inouye. (Honolulu, Hawaii: Japanese American Research Center, Honolulu Japanese Chamber of Commerce, 1973). Mr. Ogawa points out that those ethnic Japanese in Hawaii for several generations, who can still speak Japanese, speak an archaic version which makes them ridiculed and outcast if they travel to Japan; and their cultural behavior seems strange and foreign. Likewise, if they try to live on the American mainland, even in places like California with lots of Japanese, their Japanese and English speech is filled with pidgin accents and words found only in Hawaii, making them socially unacceptable.

BUTCH HELEMANO

Butch Helemano is a well-known Hawaiian cultural practitioner. He lives on O'ahu's north shore and is generally acknowledged as the self-appointed long-time caretaker of the Pu'u O Mahuka heiau -- a large sacred luakini (human sacrifice) stone temple located on a spur off Pupukea Road near Foodland. For several years he wrote a page in each month's edition of a surfing magazine distributed free in beach communities; Helemano's articles were always filled with detailed descriptions of Hawaiian cultural practices both ancient and modern.

In his 30-second commercial Helemano, with long hair down to mid-chest level, wore a dark-gray aloha shirt decorated with large light-gray flower patterns, and wore some sort of wooden human-shaped tiki on a thin chain around his neck. He spoke clearly and calmly, with a gleam in his piercing eyes which moved toward earth or sky according to what he was talking about. He seemed confident, friendly, relaxed and yet intense.

Here's what Helemano said:

"Well basically, you know, being Hawaiian allows me to look at the world with a different perspective than others that aren't. In other words we can look at the sea and look at it as a place of sacredness and look at the sky as a place that we hear and look for messages so don't forget who we are and your culture cuz that's the most important thing here as a Native Hawaiian. Kau Inoa is a way for Native Hawaiians to come together as one. To be recognized in the community and in the world as the nation who is rising like the steam rises in the volcano. E aloha mai. O wau Helemano and I placed my name with Kau Inoa."

Many people in Hawaii probably believe what Helemano said, without giving it very much thought. It's simply accepted that "indigenous" people are spiritually close to the land, even if they live in a steel, glass, and concrete building and never touch the ground for days at a time. The basis for this claim was discussed in the section on the commercial made by Lilikala Kame'eleihiwa -- ethnic Hawaiians are all descended from Haloa. Therefore they are children of the gods and brothers to the land in a way inaccessible to anyone lacking a drop of the magic blood.

There's an astonishing level of racism in Helemano's claim that ethnic Hawaiians are somehow able to see sacredness and messages in the sky and sea which others who lack a drop of the magic blood are unable to see. Certainly anyone who spends long hours daily as a fisherman or farmer will learn to see things in the ocean, land, or sky which will go unrecognized by city dwellers who spend their time in high-rise apartments. Certainly anyone who has lived in a particular place for a long time will learn to see the signs and portents of nature pertaining to that location in a way that tourists or new residents will not see. But surely that applies to ethnic Hawaiians and to non-ethnic Hawaiians equally.

The only way to claim that ethnic Hawaiians have superior knowledge of spirituality and nature compared to non-ethnic Hawaiians who have lived in the same place and engaged in the same activities is to believe in racial memory -- genetic encoding of types of perception and of learned knowledge that can be passed from parent to child automatically on account of genealogy. Indigenous people are thought to be born with the wisdom of their ancestors, so their perception and behavior is instinctively appropriate to the landscape of their ancestral homeland. Such inborn racial differences would provide a basis for asserting that one race is morally entitled to exercise racial supremacy over all others by virtue of special connectedness with the land and the gods. That's Hawaiian religious fascism.

Here are some further readings on the topic of Hawaiian racial memory in relation to political claims for racial supremacy.

Hawaiian Epistemology and Education -- A claim that anyone with a drop of Hawaiian native blood has genetically and culturally encoded unique ways of knowing and learning; and therefore ethnic Hawaiian children (and other ethnic minorities to a lesser degree) have special needs for uniquely tailored curriculum and instructional methods
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/bigfiles2/HawaiianEpistemology.html

"Polynesian" Voyaging -- Political Agenda, Ethnic Dominance, Cultural Authenticity, and Blood Nationalism. An extended book review of Ben Finney, "Sailing in the Wake of the Ancestors: Reviving Polynesian Voyaging"
Are the Polynesian voyaging canoes, and their journeys, truly Polynesian? Is there such a thing as "deep culture" or "racial memory" which allows long forgotten skills and ceremonies to be revived with authenticity?
http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/hawaiiansovereignty/polynesianvoyaging.html

Five non-Hawaiians are asking that they be allowed to register with the Kau Inoa Native Hawaiian Registration program that's being sponsored and promoted by the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

But they have yet to receive "Kau Inoa" T-shirts and, judging by what a top OHA official said, they shouldn't be expecting them anytime soon.

Kau Inoa is the highly publicized effort led by OHA to collect names and signatures for a registry of Native Hawaiians — locally and abroad — to help form the voting base for a new government. Applicants must be able to prove they have Hawaiian blood, although there is no specific blood quantum requirement.

Four of the five non-Hawaiian applicants, as well as their attorney, H. William Burgess, were previously involved in legal challenges against Native Hawaiian programs and funding. They argue the programs discriminate based on race.

Burgess said yesterday that his clients want to register for Kau Inoa because "we're standing up and saying that if there's some important decision to be made about the future of Hawai'i, we certainly want our voice heard."

The most notable of the applicants is former Honolulu Advertiser publisher Thurston Twigg-Smith, long a critic of Hawaiian preference policies. The others are Earl Arakaki, Patricia Ann Carroll, Toby Michael Kravet and Garry Paul Smith. Only Smith was not part of the Arakaki v. Lingle lawsuit that sought unsuccessfully to dismantle the funding base for OHA and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

Applying for the registry does not signal support for creating a Hawaiian entity, Burgess said. But he and his clients expect the registry to be used to discuss creation of a new Hawaiian government, he said.

"And since we're all Hawaiian — that is, we are citizens of the state of Hawai'i — we should be entitled to participate in anything that would create a new government in the state of Hawai'i."

Burgess said his clients have received letters from Hawai'i Maoli, the nonprofit arm of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs, which is being paid $232,491 annually to serve as Kau Inoa's repository and processing entity, informing them that their information had been added to the database.

However, "they didn't send us T-shirts," Burgess said, a reference to the distinct black with red logo "Kau Inoa, To Build a Nation" T-shirts given to registrants. The T-shirts have become a source of pride to some Hawaiians and a symbol of sellout to others who feel the forming of a government within the existing state does not go far enough.

OHA administrator Clyde Namu'o said applications from non-Hawaiians are kept in a separate file and are not added to the Kau Inoa database.

"The Hawaiian community will need to weigh in on the process, which will be followed for an election of delegates," Namu'o said. "It is highly unlikely that non-Hawaiians will be allowed to participant in delegate election."

Namu'o added: "Mr. Burgess may consider himself Hawaiian, but I do not believe that he is indigenous to Hawai'i. The process of building a Native Hawaiian governing entity will be limited to the descendants of the indigenous people of Hawai'i. This is consistent with the creation of other Native American governments."

Kau Inoa's Web site says registrants "will be part of the new Hawaiian nation and receive benefits provided by the new government. Registrants may also declare their intent to participate in the creation of the governing entity."

OHA officials estimate more than 70,000 Hawaiians have signed up with Kau Inoa, up from about 57,000 last year. The goal is to register about 118,000 people, which is about two-thirds of the total number of Hawaiians and part-Hawaiians in the state.

The sign-up began in January 2004.

The request of the applicants, and their likely rejection, is expected to lead to a lawsuit.

"I'd say that's certainly a possibility, maybe even probable," Burgess said. "If the registry to be used for creating a new government entity is racially exclusive, or if it's restricted by race, that would be the very same problem that the (United States) Supreme Court took care of in Rice v. Cayetano. You cannot do that and it would be very likely that a challenge would be made to that."

The 2000 Rice v. Cayetano decision by the high court struck down the requirement that only voters of Hawaiian ancestry could cast ballots in elections for OHA trustees.

Discussion of a lawsuit is "extremely premature since no one has been harmed," Namu'o said. Nonetheless, he said, "if a lawsuit is filed, we believe that we will prevail."

Several Hawaii residents, including former Honolulu Advertiser Publisher Thurston Twigg-Smith, are challenging the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs' efforts to help to create a native Hawaiian governing entity through restricted voting.

Attorney H. William Burgess said yesterday that his non-native Hawaiian clients should be included in the registry, otherwise the exclusion is a violation of the U.S. Constitution, which forbids race discrimination in public voting.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2000 struck down the practice of letting only people with Hawaiian blood vote for Office of Hawaiian Affairs trustees.

Trustees are now selected by qualified Hawaii voters, including non-native Hawaiians.

Office of Hawaiian Affairs Administrator Clyde Namu'o said the Supreme Court decision does not apply to the project to develop a voting registry of people of native Hawaiian blood.

Namu'o said state general funds were used to conduct the election of trustees, whereas ceded-land revenues are being used to finance the voting registry.

Under the Admission Act granting Hawaii statehood in 1959, native Hawaiians were named as one of the five entities to receive benefits from ceded lands.

On behalf of native Hawaiians, the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs has been designated to receive the ceded-land revenues.

Burgess said the source of the money has nothing to do with whether the Office of Hawaiian Affairs can restrict the voting registry based on race.

He said the Supreme Court has determined in the past that any elections involving public issues or public officials can not be restricted based on race, and that Namu'o was incorrect in his interpretation.
"He's just whistling in the dark," Burgess said. "He's grasping at straws."

Namu'o said the intent of the registry is to develop an information base that can be used for an election deciding the next step toward developing a native Hawaiian governing entity.

The registry, begun in 2004 to advance federal recognition of native Hawaiians as an indigenous people, has processed more than 70,000 applicants, according to an OHA official.

Namu'o said the election is no different from those conducted by other native American groups.
"These are not government elections," Namu'o said. "If a lawsuit is filed, we believe we will prevail."

-------------------

** The August 2007 edition of the OHA monthly newspaper "Ka Wai Ola" included an editorial by trustee Rowena Akana ranting and raving against the 5 non-ethic-Hawaiians and their attorney H. William Burgess who dared to apply for the Kau Inoa program. The entire 20-page newspaper can be downloaded in a 6.8 Megabyte pdf file at
http://www.oha.org/pdf/kwo07/KWO0708.pdf
The editorial by Rowena Akana is on page 13, and is copied below.

Follow the money

Rowena Akana
Trustee, At-large

On July 9, OHA received a letter
written by H. William Burgess, a
local attorney who over the years
has filed two lawsuits attacking Hawaiian
programs. His first suit resulted in the
elimination of the requirement that candidates for the OHA Board of Trustees have
Native Hawaiian ancestry. His second
lawsuit unsuccessfully sought to dismantle OHA and the Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands. The interesting thing about
these two cases is that the majority of the
plaintiffs are the same.

Mr. Burgess, in the past three years, has
spent a lot of time and energy lobbying
in Washington, D.C., against the Akaka
Bill. He has lobbied both senators and
congressmen against the bill, calling it
racist. His zeal and enthusiasm to spread
the wrong message about this bill has
been unrelenting. No one works for free.
The question should be: “Who is paying
Mr. Burgess to lobby against the Akaka
Bill and to file these lawsuits against
Hawaiians?”

In his latest letter, which was sent to
Hawai‘i Maoli, Mr. Burgess is requesting
that Hawai‘i Maoli put five of his non-Hawaiian clients – Patricia Ann Carroll,
Toby Michael Kravet, Garry Paul Smith,
Earl F. Arakaki, and Thurston Twigg-
Smith – on the Kau Inoa registration list.
Of these people, Garry Paul Smith is the
only one who is not named as a plaintiff in
any of Burgess’s previous cases challenging Hawaiian programs.

The last name on the list should be
viewed with great interest. Thurston
Twigg-Smith’s ancestors played a prominent role in the overthrow of our Hawaiian
government. This fact has been documented in our history. Now, more than
100 years later, we still see efforts to deny
Hawaiians their sovereignty and their
right to seek reparations for lands taken in
1893 without compensation. What could
Mr. Twigg-Smith be so afraid of that he
is willing to lend his name in lawsuits
against OHA, DHHL and the State of
Hawai‘i? My question to Mr. Twigg-Smith
is this: Why hide behind these other plaintiffs? At least his ancestors were right up
front about what they did to our kingdom.
Hawaiians, press on, no matter that
it has been over 119 years that we have
waited for the United States to rectify the
injustice done to our nation by some of
its citizens.

We have achieved, under the Clinton
administration, the acknowledgment of
the complicity of the United States with
some of its citizens playing a role in the
overthrow of our kingdom in the passage
of the Apology Bill. This bill sets up
the process for recognition and reparations from the federal government for the
taking of lands without compensation.
This bill – along with the report filed in
1999 in a joint effort by the Interior and
Justice departments called “From Mauka
to Makai: The River of Justice Must Flow
Freely,” which calls for the federal gov-
ernment to address the unfair taking of
the lands from the Hawaiian nation and
also acknowledges the complicity of the
federal government – gives us hope that
the Akaka Bill will one day pass.

The passage of the Akaka Bill is the
next step in beginning to address the
wrongs committed by the United States
against the Hawaiian people. We cannot
and will not let Mr. Twigg-Smith and
his attorney, Mr. Burgess, or anyone else
defeat the Hawaiian people again. We
have survived as a people over 119 years,
and we will remain here on our ancestral
lands until the end of time. We will prevail
against all odds.

If Bill Burgess and his hui want Kau Inoa shirts so bad, they can have mine.

I have three or four in a drawer somewhere, XL, XXL and medium, maybe one more, not sure. I don't think I even kau'd my inoa on the registry. Somebody had extra and a bunch ended up at my house. You know how that goes. I have some canoe club shirts I got the same way even though I don't paddle. I have T-shirts from beach clean-ups that I didn't attend. In the '80s we all wore Hard Rock Café shirts from cities we never visited. Just because someone has the shirt doesn't mean they have the heritage. Just because they have the blood doesn't mean they wear the shirt.

Why do they want the shirts so badly? What do they think comes with the shirts? Good parking at the Cazimeros' May Day concert? Twenty percent off a Sig Zane mu'umu'u? VIP seating at Merrie Monarch?

Wearing a Kau Inoa shirt won't get you into Kamehameha Schools. Having Hawaiian ancestry doesn't even guarantee admission, but no one is filing lawsuits for the Hawaiian kids who get rejected because they don't test well enough or don't have the right connections.

Having a Kau Inoa shirt or being on the Kau Inoa registry doesn't mean you'll get Hawaiian Home Lands to build your house. Plenty of Hawaiians with 50 percent blood quantum or more have the shirt but not the land. Some people have the shirt and no house at all. Lots of Kau Inoa shirts in the Leeward beach camps. Is that what they want?

You could wear a Kau Inoa shirt, get your name on the list and your life would not change at all. If anyone thinks being Native Hawaiian means suddenly your life is easy or charmed, he couldn't be more mistaken. You still have to register your car, pay taxes, wait in line at the post office and separate your glass from your plastic at the recycling center. You have to do all those things PLUS watch them sell beaches that your father once knew to build their hotels, to paraphrase that old song of lament. You have to do all those things plus navigate all the assumptions, good and bad, people carry about you because you're Hawaiian. You have to do all those things and try to decide if and when to get mad, how mad to get, what to do about it and when to not even bother. It's no pa'ina.

When being Hawaiian has an appreciable advantage in day-to-day life, maybe Burgess and his lot will have a point. But the way things are, being Hawaiian doesn't carry many advantages that those types could appreciate.

** NOTE: On August 21 there's a reply from H. William Burgess, and on August 23 another letter responding to Cataluna.

On The Hot Seat last week was Office of Hawaiian Affairs Administrator Clyde Namu'o.

Here is an excerpt from that session.

To see the full conversation, go to The Hot Seat blog at
www.honoluluadvertiser.com/opinion
and click on the posting titled: "On the Hot Seat: OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o." (Names of questioners below are screen names given during our online chat).

Kawika Kaina: What is the goal for the Kau Inoa registry? And what does OHA wish to accomplish by registering all Hawaiians? How does Kau Inoa fit in with the various sovereignty movements already present in Hawai'i? Does Ho'oulu Lahui Aloha have the same goal as the rest of the movements? How does it differ?

Clyde Namu'o: The goal of Kau Inoa is to register all Hawaiians regardless of where they live. The first step in creating a Hawaiian governing entity is to create a registry of individuals who are eligible to participate in the creation of the entity. The process of creating a governing entity will probably include a convention of some sort where Hawaiians will decide upon the type of government which they would like to create. Signing up for Kau Inoa does not commit you to a particular form of governance.

K45: How much Section 5(f) monies has OHA spent lobbying for the Akaka bill these past seven years?

Namu'o: Because OHA is lobbying for more than one legal issue at a time, i.e., the Akaka bill and similar measures, it is difficult to determine exactly what portion of the funds spent can be attributed solely to federal recognition. Advocacy is OHA's legal mandate. We are the only state agency and Hawaiian agency with this mandate. The state of Hawai'i stands to lose $50 million to $70 million per year in federal funds currently coming into the state for Native Hawaiian programs without the Akaka bill. State funds may need to be found to fill the void. To prevent these negative consequences, OHA has spent several million dollars in its effort to pass the Akaka bill. This is a small amount in comparison to what Native Hawaiians and the state stand to lose if we do not have a shield from federal lawsuits.

Ken Adams: With the Kau Inoa movement and in light of the recent lawsuits filed, how do you feel about non-Hawaiians who wish to participate in the decision-making process and should they be allowed to? I would think it would be a benefit to hear alternative points of view to better strengthen your own. Otherwise you do not get the entire picture.

Namu'o: Like other native nations in the U.S., such as the American Indians and Alaska natives, this is an attempt to build a native nation. It is for Hawaiians to come together and decide what their nation will look like. After forming a nation, they may choose to include non-Hawaiians the way other native nations have. Many Hawaiians have non-Hawaiian spouses and family members who want to show their support for Hawaiians, and so we are considering ways in which they will be able to do so. The Rice decision pertained to state funds for state elections. These are not state funds and this is not a state election.

Kekoa: Do you have another plan if the Akaka bill fails, and what is that plan please?

Namu'o: If there is a delay in passing the Akaka bill, there is no reason why the Hawaiian community cannot begin the process of organizing a Hawaiian governing entity. This is why Kau Inoa is so important, and we encourage all Hawaiians to sign up. As regards the Akaka bill, failure is not an option.

If Lee Cataluna really thinks an exclusive right to vote in elections in Hawai'i would not be of "appreciable advantage" to Hawaiians, she should urge OHA to stop wasting our public dollars on the Kau Inoa advertising campaign for a "Hawaiian-only" registry. (OHA said it had put aside $10 million for that purpose.)

All adult citizens of the state of Hawai'i already have the right to vote in all elections in which public issues are decided or public officials are elected. That's guaranteed by the 15th Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

Oh, as to the T-shirts filling Ms. Cataluna's closet, I'd recommend she give them away to kids. I'll even give her some from my closet. But, I'm not giving up my right to vote in all elections in Hawai'i, and that includes elections called for by the Akaka bill, Ho'oulu Lahui, OHA's Plan B or any other race-restricted schemes that are dreamed up.

In response to Lee Cataluna's recent column about the Kau Inoa kerfuffle: It's probably not the shirts William Burgess and his ilk want. The Burgess Five probably want what everyone wants: a say in the political process determining the future of their home.

Kau Inoa is a list of possible voters. If you aren't on there, that means you might not have the right to vote in elections that a reconstituted Hawaiian nation might hold. That sounds like disenfranchisement to me, and that's something more serious than a T-shirt.

Cataluna says: "When being Hawaiian has an appreciable advantage in day-to-day life, maybe Burgess and his lot will have a point."

Maybe Hawaiian-ness (whatever that means anymore) doesn't matter much right now. But if Burgess waits till it does matter, he might not be able to speak up anyway, since he might be considered a second-class citizen — or not a citizen at all.

In response to Justin Hahn's Aug. 23 letter, Lee Cataluna's column on Kau Inoa was right on the mark.

Cataluna correctly pointed out that with the T-shirt comes the reminder of the serious consequences that have resulted from the loss of native lands and subsequent eclipsing of native identity associated with human health and education costs that negatively impact all Hawai'i citizens.

And while Mr. Hahn worries that Mr. H. William Burgess may some day be considered a "second-class citizen" for not being able to "speak up" in the Kau Inoa process, Mr. Hahn should know that Native Hawaiians in a lot of ways are already treated like second-class citizens in their ancestral homeland.

The goal of Kau Inoa is not disenfranchisement. Kau Inoa marks the first step in creating a Hawaiian self-governing entity by establishing a registry of individuals who are eligible to participate in the creation of the entity.

For this to happen, Hawaiians everywhere must come together and make crucial decisions about how to create an effective and productive form of governance that will best serve their interests.

Kau Inoa is an opportunity for Native Hawaiians to pull together. To equate this step forward with the disenfranchisement of non-Hawaiians is yet another thinly veiled attempt to continue the disenfranchisement of Hawaiians.

Once again, Kau Inoa takes nothing away from anyone in giving Hawaiians their right to build a nation.

I read with interest Rowena
Akana’s comments on the request
by me and four of my associates to
register on the Kau Inoa registration
list. I assure you we are NOT trying
to be harmful to those of Hawaiian
blood. In fact, we are doing the
things we have been doing for the
past 10 years or so to make sure that
Hawai‘i remains the kind of place it
has been over the years for all of us,
non-Hawaiians and Hawaiians alike.

We believe, and the Supreme
Court agreed with us in Rice v.
Cayetano, that there is a racial over-
tone to the Akaka Bill and much of
the activities associated with today’s
sovereignty efforts. Hawai‘i has
never been a place that separated
people on the basis of race. Unlike
American Indian tribes – who in
order to get recognized by Congress
as Native Americans, must have a
history, among other things, of non-
assimilation – Native Hawaiians
welcomed and intermarried from
the very beginning with every race
that came to these islands.

Our desire to play a part in the mas-
sive changes in Hawai‘i that would
come about if the Akaka Bill were to
pass is a voluntary effort on our part.
Nothing sinister. We just think Native
Hawaiians and the interracial families
that make Hawai‘i a treasured place
to live are making a tragic mistake to
destroy the welcoming spirit that has
prevailed here.

Thurston Twigg-Smith
Via the Internet

** NOTE: See 3 letters in response, plus one "news report" in the October issue of the OHA newspaper, below

Organizers of the Kau Inoa
registration drive are
pressing ahead with their
efforts to compile a registry of
Native Hawaiians who want to
participate in the formation of a
new Hawaiian government entity,
despite a recent demand letter
from an attorney who has already
filed several lawsuits attacking
Hawaiian programs and may now
be setting his sights on the Kau
Inoa process.

In July, Hawai‘i Maoli – the
nonprofit arm of the Association
of Hawaiian Civic Clubs that
administers the Kau Inoa records
– received a letter from attorney
H. William Burgess demanding
that five of his non-Hawaiian clients be allowed to register for
Kau Inoa. Kau Inoa registrants are
required to provide verification
that they are of Native Hawaiian
ancestry.

Kau Inoa, or “place your
name,” was launched in 2004 by a
coalition of Hawaiian community
leaders as the first stage in form-
ing a new Hawaiian governing
entity empowered to negotiate on
behalf of the Hawaiian people in
critical matters such as land issues
and protection of native rights and
assets.

“Kau Inoa is the first and absolutely key step of gathering a list
of people of Hawaiian ancestry
willing to participate in the process,” said Clyde Nämu‘o, administrator of the Office of Hawaiian
Affairs, which is supporting the
Kau Inoa effort. Nämu‘o emphasized that Kau Inoa is separate
and distinct from the Akaka bill
that seeks federal recognition for
Native Hawaiians.

Nämu‘o said no taxpayer
money is being spent by OHA
in support of the Kau Inoa registration effort. Instead, OHA
is expending trust funds gained
through ceded land revenues to
support Hawai‘i Maoli, which
so far has processed more than
70,000 registration forms.

The five clients
whom Burgess
demanded be allowed
to register for Kau Inoa are
Thurston Twigg-Smith, Patricia
Ann Carroll, Toby Michael
Kravet, Earl Francis Arakaki
and Garry Paul Smith. All but
Smith were plaintiffs in the
recently dismissed Arakaki vs.
Lingle litigation that sought to
abolish government benefits to
Native Hawaiians. The most
widely known of the plaintiffs is
Twigg-Smith, former publisher of
The Honolulu Advertiser and a
longtime opponent of Hawaiian-preference programs, who is a
descendant of early missionaries
to Hawai‘i and the grandson of
Lorrin A. Thurston, one of the
chief architects of the overthrow
of the Hawaiian kingdom.

“The submission of these
applications by my clients should
not be construed as supporting
creation of a Hawaiian government. Rather, all five of them
wish to vote in all elections in
which important public issues are
being considered or public officials are being elected,” wrote
Burgess, who is also among a
number of opponents of Hawaiian
programs who were recently
appointed to the Hawai‘i State
Advisory Committee of the U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights (see
story on page 8).

Hawai‘i Maoli officials said
they would process the applications received by Burgess’ clients
as they would any other applications. OHA Administrator Nämu‘o
told the Advertiser that applications from non-Hawaiians are kept
in a separate file and are not added
to the Kau Inoa database.

“Like other native nations in the
U.S., such as the American Indians
and Alaska Natives, this is an
attempt to build a native nation,”
Nämu’o said during an online
Advertiser discussion forum on
Aug. 16. “It is for Hawaiians to
come together and decide what
their nation will look like. After
forming a nation, they may choose
to include non-Hawaiians the way
other native nations have.”

Kau Inoa supporters expect that
Burgess’ demand letter is the first
salvo in what is likely to become
yet another of his lawsuits against
Hawaiian programs.

“I’d say that’s certainly a possibility, maybe even probable,”
Burgess told the Advertiser. “If the
registry to be used for creating a
new government entity is racially
exclusive, or if it’s restricted by race
... it would be very likely that a challenge would be made to that.”
While Nämu‘o told the paper
that any discussion of a lawsuit is “extremely premature
since no one has been harmed,”
he said that “if a lawsuit is
filed, we believe that we will
prevail.”

----------------

Ka Wai Ola [Office of Hawaiian Affairs official monthly newspaper]
Vol. 24, No 10, October 2007, page 3, 3 LETTERS TO EDITOR
The October issue can be downloaded only in its entirety; 3.5 megabytes:
http://www.oha.org/pdf/kwo07/KWO0710.pdf

Kau Inoa challenge

I am writing in response to the letter to the editor submitted by Thurston Twigg-Smith (KWO, 9/07), who writes: " I assure you we are not trying to be harmful to those of Hawaiian blood." I, being a Native Hawaiian, respond by stating that despite your assurance to me, I feel I have been harmed by you and your colleagues.

Second, you write: "We just think Native Hawaiians and the interracial . families that make Hawai'i a treasured place to live are making a tragic mistake to destroy the welcoming spirit that' has prevailed here." I believe that it is not only the Native Hawaiians and the interracial families that have made Hawai'i a treasured phice to live, but also the non-natives and the mono-racial families. I feef your statements separate the people of Hawai'i, i.e. Hawaiians and interracial families vs. non-Hawaiians.

Finally, as a Kau Inoa registrant what is most important to me is that I was invited to participate in. this process, having qualified by being Hawaiian. You unfortunately don't qualify, and you therefore are not invited to participate in this process. I truly hope someday you are invited, but until you get the invitation, I find it rude to invite one's self and your guests at this time.

Paul K. C Hoe, Jr.
Via the Internet

Stay Hawaiian

I read the comment by Mr. TwiggSmith and am appalled to think that even in 2007 people still believe that Hawai'i Nei is the same for Hawaiians as for non-Hawaiians. Hawaiians are more disenfranchised now than EVER before. We hardly own any of the 'aina that our kiipuna taught us to respect and care for ... you tricked us and took it away. We have a school set aside for just our keikis; you're not happy with that ... you walllla take it away. Today you
want Kau Inoa, tomorrow DHHL.

Early intermarriages were a result of the haves and have-nots. Now that we are raising a nation, you claim "racial overtones and prejudice" ... we call it PRIDE! Native Hawaiians welcomed everyone in the beginning until you took advantage of our aloha and killed our spirit.

I pray every day that my people rise in unity, prevail and STAY HAWAIIAN.

Eric Konohia Temple Hills, Maryland

Aloha is reciprocal

To the heart of the matter, Mr. Twigg-Smith, your assurance to not "be harmful to those of Hawaiian blood" is baseless. Regardless of your opinion on the matter, sovereignty is a discussion for and by na kanaka maoli. At minimum, we should respect each others' cultural histories, as I do not advise African Americans on how to mend their American past.

To dismiss the role of race in Hawai'i is to deny the physical, social and emotional hardships that many in Hawai 'i's missionary, plantation and modern eras experienced. Race has always mattered.

Further, Hawai'i's "welcoming spirit" does not equate to "assimilation." Aloha is reciprocal. What reciprocity were na kanaka maoli or ka 'aina given by those welcomed by Hawai'i's shores? Despite your desire to have Hawai'i be· "the kind of place it has been over the years for all of us, non-Hawaiians and Hawaiians alike," there is nothing romantic about the displacement, disfranchisement and disempowerment of na kanaka maoli since the l800s. There are those of us who want tomorrow's history to be quite different.

Ka'iulani Kauwilanuimakahaikalani Piper Kula, Maui

----------------

Ka Wai Ola [Office of Hawaiian Affairs official monthly newspaper]
Vol. 24, No 10, October 2007, page 5
The October issue can be downloaded only in its entirety; 3.5 megabytes:
http://www.oha.org/pdf/kwo07/KWO0710.pdf

Kau Inoa passes 75,000

The process of registering Hawaiians who want to participate in the process of building a nation has marked an impressive milestone: As of last month, more than 75,000 people of Hawaiian ancestry had placed their names on the Kau Inoa registry. Those on the registry will be eligible to participate in a process of creating a Native Hawaiian governing entity.

[** Note from Ken Conklin: 75,000 is less than 18 percent of those eligible to sign up, despite many millions of dollars and nearly 4 years of intense advertising and community outreach both in Hawaii and on the mainland **]

Kau Inoa got under way three years ago, after leaders from a variety of Hawaiian organizations met to determine the first steps toward nation building. Records of the registry are maintained by Hawai'i Maoli, a nonprofit arm of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs.

OHA is providing funding and financial support for the effort, and the drive to collect registrations has been spearheaded by the staff of the agency's Hawaiian Governance Hale, who have set up registration booths at numerous fairs, festivals and community events, and even went door-to-door in neighborhoods heavily populated with Native Hawaiians. Recent testimonial television ads in support of Kau Inoa have also helped bring in substantial new registrations

Organizers say a special nod should go to supporters who sought out registrants on the U.S. continent. At a recent ho'olaule'a in Nevada, for example, nearly 200 Native Hawaiians 'placed their names on the registry.

----------------------

The Kau Inoa project is vigorously pursued throughout the United States, and also (to a lesser extent) in foreign nations. Here's a newspaper article and photo showing a license plate on a car in Ohio where an ethnic Hawaiian racial zealot is working for OHA.

** The Kau Inoa program is advertised as a registry of ethnic Hawaiians which is supposedly neutral on the Akaka bill. People are encouraged to sign up even if they oppose the Akaka bill, to develop a list of ethnic Hawaiians who want to participate in a (unspecified) process leading to self-determination (possibly including OHA Plan B for a state-recognized tribe). However, OHA has been touting the Kau Inoa registry as evidence of the number of ethnic Hawaiians who support the Akaka bill. Colin Kippen is a candidate for OHA trustee, running against OHA chair Haunani Apoliona, in the election of 2008. Kippen's article below complains that OHA is abusing the Kau Inoa registry.

Trustee At Large Candidate Colin Kippen, former Deputy Administrator at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, conducted a press conference on Wednesday, October 8, 2008 at 12 noon to release documents exposing manifest and explicit deceit by OHA under Trustee Apoliona leadership regarding the Kau Inoa registry process. Kippen continued his call for Apoliona to defend her credibility and truthfulness in light of these disclosures in a public sponsored debate. Here is his statement, which can also be seen on video at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fxie2ps-N0

I am Colin Kippen and I am running for OHA trustee. I am challenging the present Chair, Haunani Apoliona, because of OHA’s callous disregard of the needs of the Hawaiian people the state agency is mandated to serve, outrageous spending on lobbyists and mainland junkets while Hawaiians here in Hawaii suffer, and deceptive tactics regarding OHA’s Kau Inoa registration process under her leadership. I am challenging her to defend her actions in a public sponsored debate because all Hawaii voters vote in the OHA elections and we are all in the dark about what is going on at OHA.

OHA has spent millions of dollars annually on slick advertising, commercials, and mainland initiatives to get people to sign up in their Kau Inoa process. They have attempted to sell Hawaiians on this idea, telling them that the Kau Inoa roll is completely independent of the Hawaiian federal recognition bill currently before the US Congress.

When asked the question, “What is OHA’s role?” OHA has answered, “The Office of Hawaiian Affairs role in this process is as a facilitator only, providing funding and logistical help. OHA’s leadership intends to support, not direct, this community driven effort.”

These statements are far from the truth and were intended to dupe Hawaiians into signing up on the Kau Inoa registry. My intention is to rip away OHA’s veil of secrecy so that light may shine in.

In January 2007, OHA under Chair Apoliona leadership, in an executive session, submitted and discussed an action item requesting that the Akaka bill be amended to automatically enable individuals on the Kau Inoa list to become part of the Native Hawaiian Governing Entity established under the Akaka bill. We are in the dark here, and have a number of questions.

• Why did the discussion and vetting of this action item occur in an executive session called by Apoliona as board chair, with only the vote occurring in public after the OHA board came out of executive session? Why couldn’t this discussion about converting the Kau Inoa rosters to become part of the Akaka bill rosters be held in an open, public session? What was Apoliona trying to hide?

• Why did OHA, under Apoliona’s leadership, continue to maintain- - -even after adopting this so called confidential action item- - -that Kau Inoa and the Akaka bill were separate- - -even though at that very moment OHA under Apoliona’s leadership was secretly attempting to amend the Akaka bill so that Kau Inoa registrants could automatically become part of the registrant rolls of the Akaka bill?

• Why did OHA, under Apoliona’s leadership, engage in these actions to change the language of the Akaka bill while misleading Hawaiians saying that OHA only intended to “support and not direct this community driven effort?” Why has Apoliona as OHA’s Board Chair never confessed OHA’s failed attempt to merge the Kau Inoa rosters and the Akaka bill, even though it is now patently obvious that that was always OHA’s intention under her leadership? Why did OHA’s leadership attempt to mislead and deceive Hawaiians in this fashion?

OHA has created a public expectation that the Kau Inoa registration records are confidential and under the protection, possession and control of Hawaii Maoli Inc., a non profit arm of the Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs. Attached emails demonstrate that OHA staff routinely had access to these confidential Kau Inoa registrations. In fact, it appears that all OHA had to do was ask, and these confidential registrations would be immediately provided to them without question. We are in the dark here and have a number of questions:

• Why was OHA given access to these confidential records by Hawaii Maoli? How often was access provided and for what purposes? Did Hawaii Maoli obtain the consent of the Kau Inoa registrants before turning over their names to OHA? If and when access was granted by Hawaii Maoli to OHA, what were the steps to document the information conveyed and the purposes for which such information was sought? Where are these records of access granted, and how may this information of access granted be obtained by the public?

• Why was Hawaii Maoli so compliant with the requests for names by OHA staff? How much has OHA paid Hawaii Maoli and for what purposes? How many times has the Hawaii Maoli contract been extended by OHA? Had Hawaii Maoli objected to these requests for information, what is the likelihood that they would have been continued as a vendor for OHA under Apoliona’s leadership and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs?

• Why hasn’t OHA told Kau Inoa registrants that their records are not confidential and that OHA staff have free and unfettered access to them whenever they want?

The examples contained in this press release are merely the tip of the iceberg and are symptomatic of a manipulative, cynical, and secretive style of OHA leadership that no longer works. Voters are in the dark and want answers. I continue to call on Apoliona to answer these questions in a public forum with me. It is time for change.

For more information contact Colin Kippen at (808) 861-6577 or via email at
kippen@kippen4oha.org